amazing breakthru from celemony

[Stripey]

Yes, just because someone can't physically play an instrument doesn't mean that they don't have or shouldn't have the ability to compose a brilliant piece of music. This may well give people the wherewithal to achieve things musically where they may not have been able to in the past.

It's more about vision than anything else.

Yeah this is basically the premise behind hiphop and the slew of genres and amazing tunes that approach has spawned over the years, it's a democratising force in some ways, which is how some people perceived punk to be, only it has lead to a huge flush of creativity and diversity thanks to the wholehearted embracing of new, enabling technology, rather than the dead end cultural cliche punk ended up as.

[Alkaline]

Yeah this is basically the premise behind hiphop and the slew of genres and amazing tunes that approach has spawned over the years, it's a democratising force in some ways, which is how some people perceived punk to be, only it has lead to a huge flush of creativity and diversity thanks to the wholehearted embracing of new, enabling technology, rather than the dead end cultural cliche punk ended up as.

Agreed. There's so much more to hip-hop and similar genre's than swift wordplay. I love the layers that are present in some of the stuff that's available today and this sort of technology can only help to expand and hone the palette that these musicians and producers work from.

Nothing bad can come of this. At the end of the day a good tune is a good tune regardless of it's origin.

[scottST]

Yeah this is basically the premise behind hiphop and the slew of genres and amazing tunes that approach has spawned over the years, it's a democratising force in some ways, which is how some people perceived punk to be, only it has lead to a huge flush of creativity and diversity thanks to the wholehearted embracing of new, enabling technology, rather than the dead end cultural cliche punk ended up as.

plus fucking one. best post ever

[Stripey]

I think a lot of this boils down to 'who deserves the credit?'

Ultimately, someone has to have the knowledge as to what sounds good. Maybe before it would have been the guitarist who at least knew that an F doesn't fit into an E minor chord, or maybe the singer had to make sure they didn't go flat on the high notes - now the producer, engineer or whatever can sort it out. But who gets rewarded for having the musical knowledge?

Well, producers do have the musical knowledge these days, it's not about just getting a good recording of the "talent" and coming up with a mix on tape anymore.

Late 80's and especially 90's and onwards pop is really exclusively the work of talented producers rather than talented musicians. There's no-one playing guitar or bass on a britney spears single for example, the only credit on the sleeve goes to the producer, because the producer is the talent now. (although the poster child with the autotuned lyrics is the presented as the actual "talent" to the cd buying public)

[fatboy]

i think the new technology is really impressive, some times a single note or over tones playing that solo can be fixed without loosing the integrity of the sound.

yes using it for producing pop tracks and that faster and easier with less talented people where the music's integrity is lost, however people will still be able to play any instrument in front of someone and be amazed that way or impressed you don't need a fancy program for that. it's opens the boundaries with music recording and editing sure it will be exploited for making pop but who are we to say that is wrong.

[framheim]

jesus, there's no way in hell this is going to kill off live musicianship or anything like the traditional recording process. it's just another tool for being creative and a pretty cool one at that. you either use it or you don't.

i don't think it's something that should be labelled on record sleeves either, it's not going to make a blind bit of difference to whether a song is good or not so why does the average music fan need to know exactly how it was created? if a song's good it's good. it's just misguided snobbery if you don't like something because it was created using a program like this rather than 50 live takes using an analogue desk.

[spellchecker]

this thread is a bit of an eye-opener. to me (apart from a handful of posters who know who they are) it seems like most people in this thread are viewing this new software development through blinkered guitar rock/pop/indie eyes.

the video just describes and demonstrates the technology in a paradigm we can all understand - i.e. taking a basic instrument making a chording sound and splitting the constituent notes. it is supposed to inspire us, to make us think, "well if it can do that, then i could use it to do this, that, this and that...."

it is telling that the "purists" think if it is altered/played/instrumented by software, then it is somehow of less quality or calibre than traditionally tracked music. that tells me that these people do not have an understanding (as opposed to an appreciation, not required) of electronic music or even realise that artists they like have been dependent on these kinds of new technology for years.

for the last 13 or 14 years bjork has been working with programmers and producers that deliberately give her synthetic noises and themes in her music, that are completely inorganic. the same with madonna, especially ray of light or music.

i suppose i find it sad that the broadest spectrum of thought from many people on this thread is that this software "at best" can be used to "fix" bad performances, instead of considering that it could be used to enhance or make unique an already well played performance from an organic instrument, or even taking atmospheric or urban landscape noises and dissecting them using this tool.

[SeaOfEnergy]

I dont know if anyone has mentioned this, but the way this software can manipulate notes on a recording seems to me to be akin to the way a band with 1 guitarist can record several guitars into a recording with the aim to improve the overall sound of the recording.

As much as i want a band to sound exactly the same live as they do on their album, the bands album is their evidence of having a good musical 'product', and their means of being heard by/attracting people who dont go/havent been to any of their shows.

But if the band make an album that sounds amazing, and their completely balls live, cant play their stuff or sound completely different(i.e less layers etc), people are gonna notice their actually shit and the band wont get anywhere because with the present level of piracy, live shows and merchandise are where the moneys at.

I know this only relates to traditional band style setups i.e vocals/guitar/bass/drums and not electronica sort of stuff, but thats always been artificial in that the music isnt being physically played as much as its just been arranged.

So i dont think it will make shit bands seem better, it'l just make their recording better, which doesnt count for much if every live show they do disappoints their 'fans'.

Also would this software work as well with heavily distorted guitar/bass ? i cant help but doubt it.

[KimyReizeger]

As much as i want a band to sound exactly the same live as they do on their album, the bands album is their evidence of having a good musical 'product', and their means of being heard by/attracting people who dont go/havent been to any of their shows.

.

A live show and an album are two seperate forms, with different aims, requirements and tools. If you wanted a live band to sound exactly as they did on record, there would be literally no point in going to see them.

[spellchecker]

I know this only relates to traditional band style setups i.e vocals/guitar/bass/drums and not electronica sort of stuff, but thats always been artificial in that the music isnt being physically played as much as its just been arranged.

just wanted to say, this isn't universally true across the board. if you've ever watched LCD soundsystem live or on youtube, you'll know that they take a very live approach to their shows. i saw them at the lemon tree as part of the rescheduled triptych thing, they were breathtaking.

also anders trentemoeller (a big electronic artist/remixer) takes his show on the road as a live band - he DJs and 'arranges' as you described it quite well! but he also has a live drummer and guitarist.

[fatboy]

As much as i want a band to sound exactly the same live as they do on their album, the bands album is their evidence of having a good musical 'product',

i would like to think about it the other way round, a band should be getting their live sound captured on record not replicating an album of multi tracked guitars and over dubs for their live performance

yes over dubbing or double tracking guitars is useful in the studio and fills out the sound on the record however the band may not need it in a live situation and if they did then they would have appropriate members to fill the void if needed

i find many live albums capture the energy of a band without the need for extra added elements to the record

live after death, live magic, live and dangerous are a few which i think are good examples of this

[fatboy]

live after death, live magic, live and dangerous are a few which i think are good examples of this

is that because they all have "live" in their names o_O

[Mora-Treat-Guru]

This software looks awesome... I don't even bones up software - but the textural variables which are available to sound scape based individuals is awesome!!! It's silly how much time you could take fucking around with the tones with this program...

[SeaOfEnergy]

A live show and an album are two seperate forms, with different aims, requirements and tools. If you wanted a live band to sound exactly as they did on record, there would be literally no point in going to see them.

I disagree completely,i go to see bands because i like their album output, i want to hear the album loud and faithfully recreated by the people who made it, and ive seen plenty of bands that sound so similiar to their recordings its unbelievable and a good thing. To me its the true measure of a band to be able to do justice to their stuff live(especially when its ambitious), seeing how tools like this 'melodyne' make good sounding recordings easier for everyone to make.

I could name countless bands who sound near enough album-perfect at gigs, and if i went to a gig and the band sounded only remotely like their cd(lets say i like it), with missing layers, out of tune singing, bad guitar playing etc id say they had good ideas but were shit.

Im not saying recordings are less important, just that you couldnt be a professional band without being able to perform your songs live to a professional level. Yes i do see that there is leeway with live music to throw in variations on whatever,or slight improvisations but only when it doesnt sacrifice anything from the quality of the music.

i would like to think about it the other way round, a band should be getting their live sound captured on record not replicating an album of multi tracked guitars and over dubs for their live performance

thats my opinion as well, but im just talking from the p.o.v of the industry, where a bands album is their 'product' so obviously they want it to be as high quality as possible from a 'business' sense.

I love live albums that are recorded well enough to hear, but usually the tracks from live albums originate from a studio album, so their recreating the 'proper' album version anyway.

For Cranial all our recordings have been live recordings , its pointless doing it any other way till we get a bassist. Even then we might stick to live because itll give a more accurate representation of what we'd sound like at a gig.

[Pierre Von Mondragon]

Ho Ho, its the death of musicianship...again, how many times have we been told that now. I remember 'Sounds' (ask yer daddio) having a massive rant about "technology killing the skill of musicianship", ooh about when 'Ride on Time' by Black Box was number 1, in 1989, and look how right they weren't. Fucking Luddites chundering on like it was 1968 is dull, they said the phonograph would kill live performance too, and every single technical improvement/progression since. Obviously people with no real talent will make bad music, whether its scribbled down sheet music in Tin Pan Alley or some crazy Melodyned to fuck digi-noise, it doesn't make the medium any less valid.

Anyway I want it now that I've seen it, but more as the ultimate sample mashing tool, Imagine the 'Good Times' loop all moody and minor, and thats just the start, I might even start using samples again if I was able to change them that radically.

'Mon the tech.

[Stichman]

A live show and an album are two seperate forms, with different aims, requirements and tools. If you wanted a live band to sound exactly as they did on record, there would be literally no point in going to see them.

Exactly. Spot on. An album and a live show shouldn't necessarily sound the same, infact I prefer when they don't. Live performances should be less measured and more spontaneous.

Just as an example, I absolutely love 'Fourteen Autumns...' by the Twilight Sad and I absolutely love them live. They are totally different experiences - the album is much more layered with the use of accordian, drones, extra guitar tracks etc. Live, they crank up the distortion and replace the layered effect with an absolute wall of sound. Brilliant.

[framheim]

Exactly. Spot on. An album and a live show shouldn't necessarily sound the same, infact I prefer when they don't. Live performances should be less measured and more spontaneous.

Just as an example, I absolutely love 'Fourteen Autumns...' by the Twilight Sad and I absolutely love them live. They are totally different experiences - the album is much more layered with the use of accordian, drones, extra guitar tracks etc. Live, they crank up the distortion and replace the layered effect with an absolute wall of sound. Brilliant.

*ahem*

you can experience Twilight Sad for yourselves this saturday the 22nd of March in Moshulu, doors at 7.30 and a mere 7.50 to get in with support from Her Name Is Calla and Kartta.

[Stichman]

*ahem*

you can experience Twilight Sad for yourselves this saturday the 22nd of March in Moshulu, doors at 7.30 and a mere 7.50 to get in with support from Her Name Is Calla and Kartta.

Don't worry, I'll be there. At least two of them are among my favourite bands...

[Stripey]

personally I'm of the opinion that studio recordings absolutely should be calculated, finely honed pieces which fully represent the artists vision. I think it's a lot easier to bang out live performances again and again than it is to make a definitive recording, and IMO that takes more balls than performing live. I think that's why there are so many gigging bands in Aberdeen with rubbish recordings, or no recording atall heh.

[scottyboy]

I like to hear improvisation live

[Stichman]

personally I'm of the opinion that studio recordings absolutely should be calculated, finely honed pieces which fully represent the artists vision. I think it's a lot easier to bang out live performances again and again than it is to make a definitive recording, and IMO that takes more balls than performing live. I think that's why there are so many gigging bands in Aberdeen with rubbish recordings, or no recording atall heh.

Sadly, very true. We're one of them.

[la mula]

AWESOME.

Imagine the things producers will be able to do remixing other people's tracks. Or a bunch of talentless unskilled nobs making guitar solos faster than Dragonforce's. 8-)

Even if in mainstream music people with less musical skill will be able to sound professional, what you hear on the radio will still sound the same, only the live act will show the skill. What do I care whether Christina Aguilera can actually hit the notes she sings? Doesn't change anything for me.

[scottyboy]

Imagine the things producers will be able to do remixing other people's tracks. Or a bunch of talentless unskilled nobs making guitar solos faster than Dragonforce's. 8-)

I think that's already possible, you don't need to be able to move notes from within chords to do it.

[chris h]

personally I'm of the opinion that studio recordings absolutely should be calculated, finely honed pieces which fully represent the artists vision. I think it's a lot easier to bang out live performances again and again than it is to make a definitive recording, and IMO that takes more balls than performing live. I think that's why there are so many gigging bands in Aberdeen with rubbish recordings, or no recording atall heh.

I'm not sure I agree. I think I could happily sit in a studio for a long time twiddling with the latest beardy trickster's techno skills to make my slightly off- key warbling sound like Cher-like vocal magic before posting it on the aberdeen-music feedback forum in the hope that a couple of like minded souls might give it the thumbs up.

I reckon performing music live, if you've any sense of conviction in what you do, requires a relatively larger pair of balls.

Lest anyone accuse me of hypocrisy, I have used and benefited from auto-tune and various other forms of studio trickery to lend consistency to my recorded playing on numerous occasions.

I'm sure there are plenty of ways in which such techonological advances can add to our enjoyment of music. I'm equally sure that all of us musically- savvy types can distinguish between Stripey using the latest programmes to revolutionise music from his bedroom and the new McFly pretending they can really sing.

[Stripey]

Lest anyone accuse me of hypocrisy, I have used and benefited from auto-tune and various other forms of studio trickery to lend consistency to my recorded playing on numerous occasions.

I'm sure there are plenty of ways in which such techonological advances can add to our enjoyment of music. I'm equally sure that all of us musically- savvy types can distinguish between Stripey using the latest programmes to revolutionise music from his bedroom and the new McFly pretending they can really sing.

So you're saying you've used autotune to help your recordings because you couldn't play up to scratch in the studio, yet your having a go at mcfly for allegedly using it to make their singing sound up to scratch? That's a bit of a contradiction there, and sounds a lot like hypocrisy to me. Like I said, making a good definitive recording in the studio requires a lot more talent than bashing out tunes live.